[Reprint  from  June,  1917,  Journal  of  Educational  Psychology] 


PRELIMINARY  INVESTIGATION  OF  SKIMMING  IN 

READING 

y-Jr 

GUY  M.  WHIPPLE  AND  JOSEPHINE  N.  CURTIS 

n( 


Vi 

*  • 

02 


* 


PRELIMINARY  INVESTIGATION  OF  SKIMMING  IN 
J*'  READING* 

GUY  M?  WHIPPLE  AND  JOSEPHINE  N.  CURTIS 

SUMMARY 


This  appears  to  be  the  first  published  experimental  study  of  the 
process  of  skimming  in  reading.  Six  subjects,  university  students 
and  instructors,  read  selected  prose  passages  in  different  ways :  silently 
'at  normal  rate,  silently  at  maximal  rate,  aloud  at  normal  rate,  aloud 
at  maximal  rate  and  by  skimming  (sometimes  at  their  own  rate, 
ij  sometimes  at  a  prescribed  rate).  The  speed  of  reading  was  recorded 
Qby  a  stop-watch  and  in  most  experiments  the  efficiency  of  the  reading 
&  was  tested  by  demanding  a  reproduction,  orally  or  in  writing,  of  the 
•  j  passage  read.  Each  subject  also  reported,  especially  after  the  skim- 
ming  tests,  how  the  skimming  or  reading  was  done  and  in  what  ways 
5  the  skimming  differed  from  the  other  modes  of  reading. 

The  chief  conclusions  are: 

(1)  There  appear,  even  in  this  small  group  of  college-trained  per¬ 
sons,  decided  individual  differences  in  speed  and  in  efficiency  of  reading 
by  all  the  methods,  including  skimming.  One  subject,  for  instance, 
skims  three  times  as  fast  as  another. 

(2)  The  time  per  word,  in  hundredths  of  a  second,  is  approxi¬ 
mately  this:  normal  aloud,  35;  maximal  aloud,  29;  normal  silent, 
26;  maximal  silent,  22;  skimming,  14. 

(3)  Knowledge  that  reproduction  is  to  be  demanded  slows  the 
rate  of  reading  of  all  subjects  by  all  methods. 

(4)  Speed  of  skimming  increases  in  the  later  portions  of  t,exts 
several  pages  in  length. 

(5)  The  slowest  reader  is  also  the  poorest  reproducer. 

(6)  The  best  reproducer  is  a  fast,  though  not  the  fastest,  reproducer. 

(7)  The  devices  adopted  in  skimming  are  so  different  in  different 
readers  as  to  preclude  summarizing. 

(8)  Skimming,  itself,  embraces  at  least  five  different  varieties, 
or  modes. 

(9)  When  readers  are  forced  to  skim  at  a  prescribed  and  unusually 
high  rate,  reproduction  becomes  very  poor  and  the  whole  process 
becomes  disagreeable  and  flurried. 

1  This  investigation  was  carried  on  at  the  Educational  Laboratory  of  Cornell 
University,  from  February  to  May,  1914.  The  general  arrangement  and  super¬ 
vision  of  the  work  was  in  the  hands  of  Professor  Whipple,  now  of  the  University  of 
Illinois;  the  actual  experimentation  was  in  the  hands  of  Dr.  Curtis,  now  Assistant 
Psychologist  at  the  Psychopathic  Hospital,  Boston.  Acknowledgment  is  due  to 
Mr.  W.  K.  Layton,  Assistant  in  Education,  University  of  Illinois,  for  valued  help 
in  preparing  the  results  for  publication. 


(333) 


334 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


(10)  Preferred  rate  in  skimming  is  fairly  closely  correlated  with 
natural  rate  in  ordinary  reading — the  coefficient  of  correlation  between 
normal  silent  and  skimming  speeds  is  +0.71. 

(11)  Subject  matter  lying  outside  the  reader’s  general  range  of 
information  would  undoubtedly  be  skimmed  only  with  difficulty 
and  poorly,  since  in  successful  skimming  much  is  supplied  by  the 
reader’s  previous  information  or  his  interpretation  of  the  writer’s 
intent  as  gathered  from  the  context. 

(12)  It  seems  probable  that  practice  in  skimming  might  profitably  be 
given  in  the  public  school. 

Introduction 

Although  attention  has  been  paid  to  the  rate  of  reading  and 
queries  have  been  raised  as  to  the  possibility  of  developing  more 
rapid  rates  in  school  children  or  of  gaining  speed  by  eliminating 
audition  and  getting  meaning  directly  through  vision,  and  al¬ 
though  here  and  there  there  has  been  occasional  mention  of  the 
shifts  that  ocqur  in  mental  processes  with  very  rapid  reading, 
yet,  so  far  as  the  writers  know,  this  account  is  the  first  experi¬ 
mental  study  dealing  primarily  and  directly  with  the  subject 
of  skimming. 

The  following  citations  are  illustrative,  though  not  exhaustive, 
of  the  literature  to  which  we  refer: 

“  Doubtless  many  of  us  dawdle  along  in  our  reading  at  a  plod¬ 
ding  pace  which  was  set  and  hardened  in  days  of  listless  poring 
over  uninteresting  tasks  or  in  imitation  of  the  slow  reading  aloud 
which  was  so  usually  going  on  either  with  ourselves  or  with 
others  in  the  school.”  (Huey,  Psychology  and  Pedagogy  of  Read- 
ing,  pp.  179ff.) 

“One  of  the  great  advantages  of  the  shorter  lines  [as  in  news¬ 
papers]  is  that  they  constantly  permit  the  reader  to  see  in  indirect 
vision  what  his  eye  has  just  passed  as  well  as  what  is  coming 
.  .  .  a  most  desirable  condition  for  all  reading  and  especially 

for  fast  reading  or  for  skimming.”  (Huey,  Op.  tit.,  p.  411.) 

“Any  arrangement  which  makes  comprehensive  skimming  an 
easy  matter  will  be  of  great  benefit  for  large  parts  of  our  reading.” 
(Huey,  Op.  tit.,  p.  423.) 

In  all  these  exercises  [brief  blackboard  exposures  of  words  to 
be  acted  out  by  children]  the  endeavor  is  to  train  the  child  to 
omit  the  auditory  image,  to  develop  speed  in  reading  and  to  read 
for  thought.”  (Klapper,  Teaching  Children  to  Read,  p.  26.) 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


335 


“The  good  reader  takes  all  reading  to  be  his  province.  News¬ 
papers,  periodicals,  books,  old  and  new,  all  present  themselves 
to  him  in  their  proper  perspective;  they  are  all  grist  to  his  mill, 
but  they  do  not  go  into  the  same  hopper  or  require  the  same 
process.  .  .  .  Milton  may  be  read  in  words  or  lines,  Macau¬ 

lay  in  sentences,  Thackeray  in  paragraphs,  and  Conan  Doyle 
in  pages.  .  .  .  Skimming  and  rapid  reading  are  different 

processes,  but  skimming  is  at  times  a  good  thing,  too ;  even  skip¬ 
ping  becomes,  on  occasion,  a  sacred  duty.  .  .  .  For  skim¬ 

ming  implies  cream  and  skipping,  a  foothold  somewhere.”  The 
clever  reader  finally  learns  to  use  his  eye  like  a  sixth  sense,  select¬ 
ing  the  gist  of  the  matter  in  whatever  form  it  may  appear.  (Anon¬ 
ymous  writer  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  July,  1902. 

“The  principles  laid  down  in  this  most  suggestive  article  [the 
foregoing  one  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly ]  are,  however  they  appeal 
to  common  sense,  relatively  unrecognized  in  the  teaching  of 
reading.  Teachers,  when  they  thought  at  all  of  the  importance 
of  reading  with  different  paces,  have,  it  seems,  either  feared  to 
meddle  with  anything  so  dangerous  and  novel  or  else  they  have 
thought  that  experience  would  bring  ability  to  each  reader. 
Unfortunately,  it  does  not  always  do  so,  and  many  a  man  has 
wasted  days  and  days  in  conscientiously  going  through  a  process 
that  could  have  been  variously  modified  with  great  profit  to 
himself.  .  .  .  Training  in  place  of  reading  and  in  silent 

reading  are  open  fields  that  invite  every  earnest  teacher  who 
would  make  a  real  contribution  to  his  pupils  as  well  as  to  educa¬ 
tion  in  general.”  (Briggs  and  Coffman,  Reading  in  Public 
Schools,  p.  14.) 

“When  one  reads  a  selection  for  the  sake  of  the  information 
it  contains,  he  may  want  all  the  facts,  or  only  the  most  important 
facts,  or  the  argument  or  the  trend  of  the  thought ;  he  may  want 
certain  facts  or  he  may  want  simply  to  determine  whether  certain 
facts  are  there  or  not.  Each  of  these  distinct  purposes  requires 
that  the  selection  be  read  in  a  way  adapted  to  the  end  sought 
.  .  .  No  doubt  many  teachers,  accustomed  to  insist  on  literal 

thoroughness,  will  see  in  such  half-way  reading  and  ‘  skimming’ 
as  is  here  advised  the  sure  road  to  most  careless  and  slovenly 
habits,  which,  even  with  all  their  Thoroughness/  they  are  unable 
wholly  to  correct.”  (Spaulding,  Preventing  and  Correcting  Defec¬ 
tive  Reading.) 


336 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


“  A  habit  of  slow  reading  may  be  fixed  which  retards  the  devel¬ 
opment  of  the  normal  speed.  .  .  .  Some  reading  exercises 

should  be  given  with  a  time  limit,  but  individual  differences  of 
ability  should  not  be  overlooked,  and  hurried  reading  should  be 
avoided.”  ( The  Teaching  of  Reading,  State  of  New  Jersey, 
Department  of  Public  Instruction,  July,  1914,  p.  14.) 

Titchener  says  that  his  rate  of  reading  varies  considerably, 
both  with  the  subject  matter  and  with  the  purpose  in  reading. 
He  would  take  a  new  book  or  article  at  a  rush  and  then  later  go 
over  it  minutely  and  slowly  if  he  wished  the  details.  The  head¬ 
long  first  reading  is  visual  and  diffusely  organic  in  character;  the 
reader  pays  little  regard  to  headings  or  italics,  taking  in  the  first 
few  words  of  a  sentence  and  then  jumping  to  catch- words,  some¬ 
times  omitting  entire  sentences  and  even  paragraphs.  The 
organic  reaction  he  believes  to  be  widespread  and  strongly  affec¬ 
tive  ;  he  notes  also  a  play  of  facial  expression.  The  idea  is  empha¬ 
sized  that  sight  and  “attitudinal  feel”  do  the  skimming,  with 
occasional  assistance  from  internal  speech,  (j Experimental  Psy¬ 
chology  of  the  Thought  Processes. 

These  citations  indicate  that,  while  several  writers  have  urged 
the  desirability  of  increasing  the  rate  of  reading  for  certain 
situations  and  while  a  few  writers  have  even  given  thought  to 
devices  of  instruction  or  of  typography  that  would  facilitate 
skimming,  yet  those  who  have  direct  charge  of  developing  the 
reading  habits  of  children  are  inclined  to  look  doubtfully  upon 
the  idea  of  direct  training  in  skimming. 

These  citations  suggest  the  desirability  of  studying  the  process 
of  skimming  more  carefully.  Of  course,  not  every  one  that 
reads  does,  or  can  skim,  but  we  may  surmise  that  in  persons  who 
read  a  great  deal  there  is  a  tendency  to  skim,  at  least  with  certain 
kinds  of  material,  and  we  may  further  surmise  that  this  manner 
of  reading  may  be  further  developed  by  training;  possibly,  indeed, 
it  might  be  desirable  to  give  regular  practice  in  skimming  to  chil¬ 
dren  in  the  upper  grades  of  the  schools  after  they  have  sufficiently 
mastered  the  mechanics  of  ordinary  careful  word-by-word  reading. 

Such  were  the  considerations  that  led  to  our  study.  It  was 
not  found  possible  to  narrow  the  field  of  investigation  to  the 
extent  we  might  have  wished,  since,  as  our  citations  show,  there 
was  no  precedent  for  choice  of  method  or  material ;  consequently, 
we  had  to  grope  our  way  along  and  our  results  can  claim  to  be 
no  more  than  tentative  outcomes  of  a  pioneering  survey. 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


337 


The  Observers 

The  observers  were  B,  Mr.  Boring,  an  instructor  in  experi¬ 
mental  psychology  who  was  accustomed  to  skimming;  Fr,  Mr. 
Frazer,  an  assistant  in  educational  psychology,  who  did  not  skim 
but  read  very  fast,  finding  this  more  economical  than  to  do  the 
selecting  necessary  in  skimming;  Gst,  Mr.  Goldstone,  an  under¬ 
graduate  who  read  very  rapidly  but  did  not  skim  and  who  had 
a  slight  speech  defect  (a  lisp  and  a  tendency  to  stutter) ;  SJc,  Mr. 
Skinner,  a  graduate  working  in  psychology  and  educational 
psychology  who  read  slowly  and  did  not  skim  except  when  look¬ 
ing  for  some  particular  thing  on  a  page;  D,  Miss  Dimmick,  an 
undergraduate  who  had  done  considerable  work  in  psychology 
and  educational  psychology  and  who  read  very  fast  without 
skimming;  and  Gou ,  Miss  Goudge,  a  graduate  working  in  psy¬ 
chology  and  educational  psychology,  who  said  that  the  nature 
of  the  subject  matter  determined  her  method  of  reading. 

Method  of  Experiments 

Five  kinds  of  reading  were  used:  (1)  reading  silently  at  what 
the  observer  considered  his  normal  rate;  (2)  reading  silently 
at  maximal  rate;  (3)  reading  aloud  at  normal  rate;  (4)  reading 
aloud  at  maximal  rate,  and  (5)  skimming.  The  observer  held 
the  material  in  his  own  hands  and  started  skimming  or  reading 
at  a  signal,  saying  “ Finished,”  or  “Done,”  when  the  assignment 
was  completed.  He  was  told  beforehand  how  many  pages  there 
were  in  each  article,  that  he  would  be  required  to  reproduce, 
either  orally  or  in  writing,  as  much  of  the  article  as  possible, 
and  that  after  the  reproduction  he  would  be  asked  to  give  a 
detailed  description  of  how  he  skimmed  or  read,  especially  as 
to  differences  between  skimming  and  reading.  By  the  use  of 
a  split-second  stop-watch  the  time  spent  on  each  page  and  on  the 
whole  article  was  accurately  recorded.  The  material  used  varied 
from  one  set  of  experiments  to  another,  sometimes  typewritten 
sheets,  sometimes  books  on  educational  topics. 

Preliminary  Experiments 

Preliminary  experiments  were  performed  both  to  ascertain 
what  method  and  what  material  would  probably  be  best  for  the 
main  experiments  and  also  to  give  the  observers  some  practice. 
Typewritten  sheets  were  used  as  the  material ;  these  were  of  equal 
length,  and  did  not  vary  as  to  type,  spacing,  margins,  paragraph- 


338 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


ing,  etc.,  but  only  in  subject  matter  and  style.  Since  the  sheets 
contained  almost  exactly  the  same  number  of  words,  the  rate  of 
reading  is  recorded  in  the  average  number  of  seconds  required  to 
read  the  pages,  and  not — as  in  the  later  tables — in  the  average 
time  spent  on  each  word.  The  observers  who  took  part  in  these 
preliminary  experiments  were  D,  Fr,  Gou,  Gst,  and  Sk. 

TABLE  I. 

Average  Time  Taken  for  Reading  Typewritten  Sheets  at  the  Various  Rates 


Observer 

Silent 

Aloud 

Normal 

Maximal 

Normal 

Maximal 

Time 

Rank  Time 

Rank 

Time 

Rank 

Time 

Rank 

D .  72.5 

2 

68.3 

4 

81.9 

1 

77.2 

3 

Fr .  78.5 

3 

50.3 

2 

86.0 

3 

64.0 

1 

Gou .  89.6 

4 

74.0 

5 

84.6 

2 

75.0 

2 

Gst .  51.9 

1 

47.6 

1 

91.4 

4 

84.4 

4 

Sk .  93.5 

5 

67.3 

3 

92.1 

5 

85.6 

5 

TABLE 

2 

Percent  of  Typewritten  Sheets  Reproduced 

Observer 

Silent 

Aloud 

Normal 

Maximal 

Normal 

Maximal 

Percent.  Rank 

Percent.  ' 

Rank 

Percent. 

Rank  Percent. 

Rank 

D...  36.73 

3 

29.70 

2 

27.52 

5 

24.17 

3 

Fr...  57.61 

1 

39.18 

1 

66.41 

1 

31.73 

2 

Gou.  42.28 

2 

21.85 

3 

29.81 

3 

23.26 

4 

Gst..  34.50 

4 

17.40 

4 

41.32 

2 

34.01 

1 

Sk...  18.00 

5 

15.35 

5 

27.98 

4 

17.86 

5 

From  the  tabulated  results  of  the  preliminary  experiments 
(Tables  1  and  2),  we  find  that  Gst  is  a  very  rapid  silent  reader. 
He  reports  no  kinaesthetic  imagery  at  all  and  very  little  auditory 
imagery,  so  it  is  quite  probable  that  he  is  a  visual  reader.  Fr  is 
evidently  the  best  reproducer,  and  Sk  the  poorest.  The  others 
show  considerable  variation.  In  comparing  Tables  1  and  2  we 
find  that  the  slowest  reader  is  the  poorest  reproducer,  and  that 
the  best  reproducer  is  above  the  average  in  speed  of  reading. 
Table  3  records  the  results  secured  when  the  material  was  read 
with  the  definite  knowledge  that  it  would  not  have  to  be  repro¬ 
duced.  The  significance  of  these  figures,  while  not  apparent 
here,  will  be  evident  later. 

TABLE  3 


Decrease  in  Time  Required  to  Read  a  Sheet  (on  the  Average )  When  Reproduction  was 

Not  Required 

Silent  Aloud 


Observer  Normal 


Maximal 


Normal  Maximal 


D... 

Fr... 

Gou 

Gst.. 

Sk.. 


10.7  (14.76%) 
19.1  (24.33%) 
31.0  (34.60%) 
00.4  (  0.77%) 

30.7  (32.83%) 


14.0  (20.50%) 
8.1  (16.10%) 
26.1  (35.27%) 
04.7  (  9.87%) 
3.5  (  5.20%) 


2.2  (  2.69%) 
7.6  (  8.84%) 

5.3  (  6.26%) 
11.0  (12.04%) 

2.0  (  2.2  %) 


11  (  1-43%) 
7.5  (11.72%) 
15.4  (20.50%) 
7.9  (  9.36%) 
5.1  (  5.96%) 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


339 


In  the  second  part  of  the  preliminary  experiments  the  type¬ 
written  sheets  were  abandoned  because  of  the  relative  illegibility 
of  the  print,  the  evident  advantage  in  skimming  of  having  the 
material  divided  properly  into  paragraphs,  and  the  difficulty  of 
providing  enough  sheets  for  the  entire  experiment.  Selections 
from  the  Bulletins  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Education 
were  used  instead.  In  any  one  bulletin  three  selections  were 
read:  one  normal  silent,  one  maximal  aloud,  and  the  third 
skimmed  in  roughly  one-half  or  one-third  the  time  which  the 
observer  would  probably  have  taken  to  read  the  selection  at 
normal  silent  speed.  Reproductions  were  taken  as  before.  The 
results  of  this  work  will  be  found  in  Tables  4  and  5. 

TABLE  4 


Average  Time  per  Word  and  Average  Per  Cent,  of  Material  Reproduced  from  the  Bulletins 
(Figures  are  enclosed  in  parentheses  when  the  number  of  cases  is  too  small  to 
ensure  accurate  results.) 


Normal  Silent 

Maximal  Aloud 

Skimming 
(3^  Normal) 

Skimming 
(K  Normal) 

Time 

Percent. 

Time 

Percent. 

Time 

Percent. 

Time  Percent 

D.... 

.  .27 

80 

.25 

63 

.11 

28 

.08 

35 

Fr... 

.  .22 

88 

.20 

90 

.11 

45 

.08 

60 

Gou. 

..  .24 

58 

.22 

50 

(ID 

10 

.08 

30 

Gst. 

..  .12 

(53) 

.24 

(42) 

.06 

5 

.04 

30 

Sk.., 

..  .33 

57 

.28 

53 

TABLE  5 

.15 

25 

.10 

30 

Observers  Arrangec  in  Order  of  Speed  of  Reading  and  of  Excellence  of  Reproduction 

•  from  the  Bulletins 

Normal  Silent  Maximal  Aloud  Skimming  ()/£  Normal)  Skimming  Normal) 


Time  Percent. 

Time 

Percent. 

Time 

Percent. 

Time 

Percent. 

Gst 

Fr 

Fr 

Fr 

Gst 

Fr 

Gst 

Fr 

Fr 

D 

Gou 

D 

D] 

D 

Fr') 

D 

Gou 

Gou 

Gst 

Sk 

Fr  l 

S 

Gou  > 

Gst] 

D 

Sk 

Gst 

Gou 

(Gou) 

Gou 

Dj 

Gou  > 

Sk 

Gst 

Sk 

(Gst) 

Sk 

Gst 

Sk 

SkJ 

From  these  tables  we  may  conclude  that  Fr  is  the  best  repro¬ 
ducer,  D  the  next  best,  and  that  Sk  is  the  lowest  reader.  Here 
the  results  for  Fr  and  Sk  agree  with  those  obtained  from  the 
earlier  experiments. 

The  chief  features  of  the  reports  about  what  happened  in 
skimming  are  as  follows:  D  reported  that  she  read  the  topic  sen¬ 
tence2  carefully  and  then  followed  down  the  sides  of  the  para¬ 
graph,  catching  an  important  word  occasionally  and  then  follow¬ 
ing  the  sentence  until  the  verb  was  reached.  Fr  attempted  to 

2  The  observers  in  these  experiments  meant  by  the  “topic  sentence,” — the  one 
which  contained  the  gist  of  the  paragraph, — most  often  the  first  sentence  in  the 
paragraph. 


340 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


force  the  pace  by  reading  vertically,  but  found  it  could  not  be 
done,  and  finally  hit  upon  the  method  of  noting  necessary 
“beads,”  i.  e.,  important  words,  which  occur  at  fairly  regular 
distances  apart  (?);  he  says  skimming  is  successful  and  easy  if 
one  can  fit  one’s  jumps  of  attention  to  this  distance  between 
important  words.  Gou  read  the  topic  sentences,  and  then, 
keeping  these  in  mind,  skimmed  down  the  center  of  the  page  for 
new  ideas  of  importance.  She  usually  read  some  or  all  of  the 
concluding  sentences  of  paragraphs.  Gst  skipped  from  topic 
to  topic,  keeping  the  leading  ones  in  mind,  omitting  the  middle 
portions  of  sentences,  and  emphasizing  nouns.  Sk  took  note 
of  the  main  words,  that  is,  the  more  general  ones,  supplying  the 
others.  These  reports  will  be  generalized  later,  when  the  results 
of  the  main  experiments  are  discussed. 

Main  Experiments 

In  the  main  experiments  Mangold’s  Child  Problems  was  used 
as  the  material  for  reading;  since  its  subject  matter  was  about 
equally  familiar  to  all  the  observers,  its  text  is  divided  into  sec¬ 
tions  of  approximately  equal  length,  and  it  was  long  enough  to 
afford  a  good  deal  of  material.  The  observers  in  this  part  of  the 
investigation  were  B,  D,  Fr,  Gou,  Gst,  and  Sk.  The  method  used 
was  the  same  as  in  the  previous  work,  except  that  after  three 
selections  (about  two  pages  each)  had  been  skimmed  at  a  rate 
chosen  by  the  subject,  one  selection  was  read  at  some  other  speed, 
as,  for  example,  maximal  silent.  In  all,  twelve  selections  were 
skimmed.  The  results  from  these  experiments  are  recorded  in 
Tables  6,  7,  and  8. 

From  the  arithmetical  results  we  may  draw  the  following 
conclusions : 

(1)  The  twelve  passages  appear  to  have  been  about  equal  in 
difficulty,  since  no  one  of  them  is  found  to  stand  uniformly  high 
or  low  in  the  speed  with  which  it  was  skimmed  by  the  six  readers 
(Table  6.) 

(2)  The  speed  of  reading  under  these  conditions  is  such  that 
on  the  average  5.9  words  are  covered  (not  read,  of  course)  per 
second,  or  one  word  each  0.169  sec.  (Table  7.) 

(3)  Under  instructions  to  skim  there  remain  marked  individual 
differences  in  the  rate;  thus,  to  cite  extremes,  Gst  skims  at  nearly 
three  times  the  pace  of  Gou ;  again,  we  note  that  Fr  can  read 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


341 


TABLE  6 


Twelve  Passages  Arranged  in  Order  of  Speed  for  Each  Reader 

B  D  Fr 

Gou 

Gst 

Sk 

7  10  4 

6 

4 

5 

8 

3  5 

3 

2 

1 

4 

7  7 

1 

6 

4 

12 

8  10 

5 

1 

8 

6 

9  1 

8 

5 

11 

10 

1  9 

9 

9 

7 

2  11  12 

4 

10 

10 

11  12  2 

7 

12 

9 

9 

2  6 

12 

7 

12 

3 

4  11 

10 

11 

6 

5 

6  3 

11 

3 

2 

1 

5  8 

2 

8 

3 

TABLE  7 

Average  Time  per  Word  in  Skimming  12  Passages  {in  Sec.) 

Reader 

12  1st  pages 

12  2d  pages 

8  3d  pages 

General  Aver. 

B . 

.211 

.154 

.135 

.171 

D . 

.176 

.150 

.166 

.164 

Fr . 

.155 

.157 

.164 

.158 

Gou . 

.247 

.233 

.194 

.228 

Gst . 

.107 

.097 

.085 

.097 

Sk . 

.257 

.210 

.177 

.199 

Aver. . . . 

.192 

.167 

.153 

.169 

TABLE  8 

Average  Per  Cent,  of  Reproduction  for  Each  Selection  Skimmed 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

Av. 

B . 

...50 

50 

50 

60 

60 

60 

80 

75 

75 

50 

50 

50 

59 

D . 

...70 

60 

50 

50 

60 

60 

60 

50 

80 

30 

30 

40 

53 

Fr . 

...60 

80 

70 

80 

85 

70 

75 

80 

85 

85 

80 

80 

78 

Gou. . . . 

...85 

90 

75 

75 

60 

75 

70 

60 

70 

40 

60 

80 

70 

Gst . 

...75 

60 

70 

60 

50 

50 

70 

60 

50 

60 

30 

60 

58 

Sk . 

...80 

60 

25 

60 

40 

60 

70 

40 

60 

20 

50 

30 

50 

aloud  (Table  4)  faster  than  Gou  skims  silently  in  these  passages 
(Table  7).  In  fact,  it  appears  htat  Gou  really  does  not  succeed 
in  achieving  any  noticeable  increase  of  speed  when  directed  to 
skim  (her  rate  per  word  in  normal  silent  reading  is  0.24  sec.  per 
word;  in  maximal  speed  aloud,  0.22  sec.;  in  skimming  0.228  sec.) 

(4)  By  comparing  the  speed  of  skimming  by  pages,  we  find 
that  it  runs  approximately  0.19  sec.  per  word  for  the  first  page, 
0.17  sec.  per  word  for  the  second  page  and  0.15  sec.  per  word 
in  the  third  page  (of  the  8  passages  that  ran  over  two  pages  in 
length).3  The  explanationis  presumably  in  part  general  a warm¬ 
ing  up”  to  mental  work,  in  part  increase  of  ease  of  “skipping” 
in  the  later  portions  of  the  selections  as  the  context  “piled  up” 
and  supplied  more  and  more  material  for  guiding  the  reader. 


3  The  data  from  which  these  figures  are  derived  are  not  shown  in  detail  in  any  of 
our  tables. 


342 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


The  following  conclusions  may  be  drawn  from  the  statements 
of  the  observers  as  to  their  methods  of  skimming: 

(1)  All  the  observers,  with  the  possible  exception  of  Fr,  read 
the  greater  part  of  the  first  sentence ,  “to  get  the  Tun’  of  the  thing.” 

(2)  After  this,  skipping  began,  and  now  greater  individual 
variations  were  found.  B  usually  stopped  in  sentences  after 
reading  about  half,  or  enough  to  determine  whether  the  thought 
had  been  changed,  and  jumped  practically  all  quotations.  D 
read  the  first  sentence,  and  then  passed  down  the  page,  selecting 
words  that  seemed  important,  hesitating  long  enough  to  get 
their  meaning  in  the  sentence.  She  pronounced  to  herself  only 
the  important  words.  Fr  read  vertically,  finding  that  two  words 
usually  gave  the  meaning  of  a  line,  took  fairly  large  jumps,  and 
noted  a  tendency  to  stop  and  read  “slogans”  and  “catch-words.” 
Gou  believed  that  her  eye  movement  was  faster  than  in  ordinary 
reading.  She  skipped  usually  just  after  getting  a  new  and  impor¬ 
tant  point,  moving  the  eye  vertically  at  these  times,  trying  to 
select  anything  important  enough  to  be  read,  in  part  or  entire. 
Gst  skipped  no  entire  sentences,  but  in  reading  the  last  thought 
of  a  sentence  attempted  to  catch  the  opening  phrase  of  the  next, 
and  then  omitted  it  if  it  was  not  the  thought  wanted.  He  filled 
in  a  great  deal  from  previous  experience.  Sk  read  “mostly  the 
high  places,”  attempting  to  read  the  outline  of  the  selection 
and  infer  the  remainder.  Frequently,  after  glancing  at  the  first 
few  words  of  a  phrase  or  sentence,  he  could  judge  whether  or 
not  to  go  on.  In  jumping  from  a  sentence  to  several  below,  he 
found  no  particular  criterion  by  which  to  determine  where  to 
begin  again,  sometimes  starting  in  at  a  new  paragraph  and  again 
at  some  particular  word  or  phrase  that  he  happened  to  see.  In 
general,  he  read  the  first  sentence  of  a  selection  and  then  enough 
of  the  succeeding  sentences  to  find  out  whether  or  not  they  were 
essential  or  were  merely  elaborations  or  “filling-in”  of  the  pre¬ 
vious  thought.  If  they  were  essential,  enough  was  read  to  give 
the  thought,  and  if  not,  a  jump  was  made  to  the  next  sentence 
or  phrase,  and  it  received  similar  treatment. 

(3)  The  observers  differed  in  their  treatment  of  the  last  sen¬ 
tences  of  a  paragraph;  D  always  read  them,  Gst  never  unless 
forced;  the  others  sometimes  read  them  and  sometimes  did  not. 

(4)  The  observers  differed  also  in  the  discrimination  used  in 
rejecting  certain  parts  of  the  material.  B  reported  that  he  skipped 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


343 


sentences  referring  to  particular  instances  of  laws,  that  is,  those 
containing  names  of  states,  phrases  whose  sense  was  markedly 
supplementary,  and  quotations.  He  regarded  quotations  as 
“padding.”  D  skipped  sentences  beginning  with  small  words, 
or  where  there  seemed  to  be  no  important  words.  Fr  tried 
to  skip  minor  details,  but  reported  that  he  was  really  “too  con¬ 
scientious  to  be  a  good  skimmer”  and  feared  lest  he  might  omit 
something  important.  Gou,  after  a  new  “important  point,” 
moved  down  the  page  until  she  found  another  important  point. 
Gst  skipped  what  seemed  to  be  “filling-in”  and  details  that  were 
known.  Sk  skipped  parts  “not  essential  to  the  gist” — whenever 
he  thought  he  could  reason  or  infer  the  meaning  without  read¬ 
ing.  Evidently,  B  used  more  logical  discrimination  in  his  skip¬ 
ping  than  did  the  other  observers. 

(5)  The  influence  of  punctuation  was  mentioned  by  B,  D ,  and 
Fr;  B  reported  that  it  was  taken  “on  the  jump,”  not  exactly 
the  mere  marks,  but  the  general  spacing  of  the  sentence.  He 
found  that  the  exclamation  mark  had  tremendous  attention- 
compelling  power.  D  thought  punctuation  gave  hints  as  to  the 
importance  of  the  material;  she  had  a  tendency  to  read  material 
set  off  by  quotation  marks.  Fr  found  the  attraction  of  capitals 
and  quotation  marks  so  strong  that  he  jumped  directly  to  them. 
Gst  said  that  punctuation  marks  did  not  exist  for  him,  but  he  gave 
preference  to  short  sentences,  so  probably  he  was  affected  by 
the  spacing,  at  least.  Sk  mentioned  capitals  and  italics.  In 
general,  there  seemed  to  be  a  rather  definite  tendency  for  all 
observers  to  attend  to  proper  nouns,  italics,4  and  quotation  marks. 

(6)  There  was  a  considerable  amount  of  individual  variation 
as  to  the  kinds  of  material  easy  to  skim,  and  difficult  to  skim. 
B  could  skim  easily  what  was  well-paragraphed,  D  what  was 
tabulated,  Fr  if  the  “pitch”5  was  fairly  wide  and  successfully 
estimated  near  the  beginning;  Gst  found  it  hard  to  skim  what  was 
interesting,  while  Sk  found  this  easy. 

From  the  preliminary  experiments  it  was  evident  that  con¬ 
densed  material  is  very  hard — almost  impossible — to  skim;  and 
that  when  the  material  is  divided  into  paragraphs,  it  is  easier 
to  skim  than  if  it  is  all  in  one  paragraph.  From  the  results  of 

4  Our  observers  differ  from  Titchener  evidently  in  this  and  other  respects. 

5  “Pitch”  apparently  meant  the  amount  of  the  skip  or  jump  to  be  made,  the 
distance  from  one  essential  idea  to  the  next  one. 


344 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


some  of  the  auxiliary  work,  it  was  evident  that  skimming  was 
easier  in  material  in  which  the  first  sentence  of  each  paragraph 
was  the  topic  sentence. 

(7)  There  was  a  tendency  to  glance  back  at  catch-phrases,  ital¬ 
icized  words,  etc.,  or  perhaps  merely  at  the  form  or  length  of  the 
paragraphs,  to  summarize  the  impressions  gained.  Doubtless 
the  knowledge  that  a  reproduction  of  the  passage  was  to  be 
demanded  prompted  this  hasty  retrospective  glance.  This 
tendency  was  shown  particularly  by  B,  D,  Gou,  and  Gst. 

(8)  Certain  notes  made  by  the  experimenter  show  differences 
in  the  forms  of  the  reproductions.  Thus  B  gave  a  logical  para¬ 
phrase;  Ft  gave  details  and  all  in  proper  order;  Gou  gave  her 
reproduction  slowly  but  with  evidence  of  the  “logical  schemas” 
which  she  was  accustomed  to  make  during  the  skimming;  Gst 
often  reproduced  first  the  material  which  he  had  read  last.  Fr 
is  a  lip-reader  and  sometimes  whispers  the  words. 

(9)  There  are  apparently  different  modes  of  rapid  reading  and 
skimming :  (a)  fast  reading,  in  which  every  word  is  read,  usually 
in  kinaesthetic  or  auditory-kinaesthetic  terms;  (b)  “trailing,” 
which  is  “perceiving  without  apperceiving,”  catching  impressions 
which  may  or  may  not  be  meaningful  for  the  context — probably 
not  in  most  cases;  (c)  “covering,”  like  trailing,  except  that  it 
may  be  either  up  and  down  or  right  and  left,  while  trailing  is 
the  latter;  (d)  omitting  logically,  the  procedure  used  when  the 
first  few  words  of  a  sentence  are  read  and  the  observer  decides 
it  is  unimportant  and  omits  the  rest;  (e)  omitting  arbitrarily,  as 
Fr  did.  (This  observer,  when  starting  a  new  selection,  arbi¬ 
trarily  chose  a  size  of  “jump”  which  he  thought  fitted  the  mater¬ 
ial,  and  then  took  jumps  of  this  size  throughout,  reading  only 
those  words  which  happened  to  come  at  the  end  of  a  jump.)  Of 
the  methods  mentioned,  B  used  (b)  and  (d),  D  (b)  or  (c),  and  (d), 
Fr  (e),  Gou  (b)?,  (c)?,  (d),  Gst  (b)  and  (d),  and  Sk  (b)  and  (d). 

Auxiliary  Experiment  1 
(Extra  Fast  Skimming) 

From  the  results  of  the  main  experiments  it  was  evident  that 
the  observers  differed  greatly  in  the  speed  of  skimming  (see 
Tables  4  and  7),  and  it  therefore  seemed  advisable  to  discover, 
if  possible,  what  would  be  the  effect  of  diminishing  the  time  allowed 
for  the  skimming,  by  forcing  each  observer  to  skim  faster  than 
he  would  naturally. 


3 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


345 


The  observers  who  took  part  in  this  work  were  D,  Fr,  Gou, 
Gst,  and  Sk.  The  material  was  four  educational  reprints  which 
contained,  respectively,  3476, 1764,  1650,  and  3360  words.  Three 
minutes  were  allowed  for  skimming  the  first  (the  observer  was 
warned  at  the  expiration  of  each  quarter  of  the  time) ;  one  minute 
for  the  second ;  one  minute  for  the  third,  and  one  minute  and  a 
half  for  the  fourth.  The  rate  of  skimming  was  .05  per  word 
for  the  first,  .03  for  the  second,  .04  for  the  third,  and  .03  for  the 
fourth  reprint.6 

The  following  conclusions  may  be  drawn  from  this  experiment : 

(1)  Reproduction  falls  off  when  the  observer  is  forced  to 
read  at  these  high  speeds.  Gou  and  Fr  tried  to  get  only  the  main 
points  and  skip  the  rest,  while  the  other  observers  tried  to  trail 
over  the  whole  thing  and  lost  everything. 

(2)  In  general,  the  first  sentence  of  a  paragraph  is  more  likely 
to  be  read  than  the  rest;  italics  are  likely  to  be  read,  and  fine 
print,  such  as  that  used  for  foot-notes,  is  almost  sure  to  be  omitted. 

(3)  The  main  points  in  the  reports  of  the  observers  are  as 
follows:  D  failed  to  get  connected  ideas,  took  larger  jumps  and 
read  largely  by  italicized  words  and  phrases  rather  than  sentences 
— “did  not  like  skimming  so  fast”;  Fr  read  italics  and  quotations 
and  guessed  at  the  content  of  the  paragraphs  (a  few  supplemen¬ 
tary  experiments  revealing  that  Fr,  when  instructed  to  skim 
as  fast  as  possible,  seemed  to  give  up  his  system  of  arbitrary 
j  umps  and  skim  as  the  others  did) ;  Gou  could  not  work  out  logical 
schemas  as  she  did  before,  and  could  reproduce  only  the  first 
sentence  of  paragraphs;  Gst  notices  slight  emotional  disturbances, 
and  found  it  hard  to  keep  the  logical  sequence  of  ideas,  and  was 
able  to  reproduce  practically  nothing  from  the  fastest  passages; 
Sk  got  no  sense  out  of  the  articles  and  noted  only  the  first  sen¬ 
tences  of  paragraphs  or  those  which  stood  out  because  of  quota¬ 
tion  or  question  marks. 

Auxiliary  Experiment  2 
(Long  Passages) 

An  additional  experiment  was  carried  out  to  see  what  would  be 
the  effect  of  length  of  passage  on  the  rate  of  skimming.  For  this 
were  used  six  educational  reprints,  varying  in  length  from  2805 

6  These  rates  may  be  compared  with  those  for  normal  silent  reading  (roughly 
.20  to  .30)  and  for  the  previous  skimming  (roughly  .08  to  .17). 


346 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


to  6624  words.  All  observers  except  B  took  part.  The  method 
was  the  same  as  that  used  on  the  main  experiments.  The  results 
given  in  Table  9  show  that  the  rate  of  skimming  quickened  with 
the  lengthening  of  the  article  to  be  skimmed.  It  should  be 
noted,  however,  that  this  increase  in  speed  may  be  almost  entirely 

TABLE  9 

Average  Speed  of  Skimming ,  in  Sec.  per  Word,  for  Articles  of  Varying  Length 
(Articles  A  and  B  contained  3000  words,  C  4000;  D  and  E  5000;  and  F  6600,  approxi¬ 
mately.) 

A  B  C  D  E  F 


D . 10  .16  .09  .09  .11  .05 

Fr . 07  .08  .07  .05  .08  .07 

Gou . 12  .17  .10  .12  .18  .14 

Gst . 06  .09  .06  .05  .07  .05 

Sk . 08  .20  .11  .06  .07  .06 


Av .  .12  .09  .09  .07 


brought  about  by  the  observer’s  decision  that  he  has  already 
“ taken  in”  all  he  can  hold  for  the  coming  reproduction  and  that 
he  will  attempt  to  read  nothing  but  the  most  important  points 
on  the  later  pages.  D,  losing  interest  toward  the  end  of  the 
passages,  skipped  a  great  deal  there  and  felt,  that,  in  general, 
she  skimmed  in  the  same  manner  as  in  the  shorter  passages;  Fr 
took  longer  steps;  Gou  thought  she  skipped  more  in  skimming  a 
long  than  a  short  article;  Gst,  when  told  in  advance  that  the  article 
was  long,  tended  to  hurry  his  skimming;  Sk  read  less  carefully  in 
the  longer  selections  and  omitted  much  more  of  the  material. 

Auxiliary  Experiment  3 
(Rates  of  Reading) 

A  last  set  of  tests  was  carried  out  to  determine  more  precisely 
than  the  conditions  in  the  other  experiments  had  permitted, 
the  relations  between  the  rates  of  reading  by  the  five  different 
methods.  Here  the  material  used  was  educational  reprints.7 
The  observers  were  D,  Fr,  Gou,  Gst,  and  Sk.  The  method  was 
as  follows:  each  reprint  was  divided  in  halves;  the  first  half  was 
then  read  by  one  of  the  five  methods,  the  time  recorded,  etc.; 
then  the  second  half  was  read  by  another  of  the  methods.  In 

7  The  following  may  be  cited  as  examples  of  reprints  used  in  this  wrork :  Kirk¬ 
patrick,  ‘‘Child  Study,”  Pop.  Sci.  Mo.,  1910;  Ayres,  “Psychological  Tests  in  Voca¬ 
tional  Guidance,”  this  Journal,  1913;Bagley,  “ Elective  Studies  in  the  High-School 
Curriculum,”  Sch.  Rev.,  1908;  Bingham,  “The  Use  of  Experiment  in  Teaching 
Educational  Psychology,”  this  Journal,  1910. 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


347 


all,  8  passages  were  read  by  each  method;  the  same  passage  was 
never  re-read.  This  general  arrangement  was  designed  to  cancel 
out  the  effects  of  possible  unevenness  of  the  material. 

TABLE  10 

Average  Time,  in  Seconds  per  Word,  for  Selections  Read  by  the  Five  Methods 

Silent  Aloud 

Normal  Maximal  Normal  Maximal  Skimming 

Time  Rank  Time  Rank  Time  Rank  Time  Rank  Time  Rank 


D . 

.28 

3 

.25 

3.5 

.33 

3 

.27 

2.5 

.15 

4 

Fr . 

.19 

2 

.16 

2 

.27 

1 

.24 

1 

.12 

2 

Gou. . . 

.32 

4 

.25 

3.5 

.40 

4 

.28 

4 

.17 

5 

Gst.. . . 

.13 

1 

.11 

1 

.32 

2 

.27 

2.5 

.08 

1 

Sk . 

.37 

5 

.32 

5 

.43 

5 

.37 

5 

.14 

3 

Av.. 

.  .26 

.22 

.35 

.29 

.13 

TABLE  11 

Average  Reproduction  {on  Scale  of  100 )  for  the  Five  Methods 


Silent  Aloud 


Normal 

Maximal 

Normal 

Maximal 

Skimming 

% 

Rank 

% 

Rank 

% 

Rank 

% 

Rank 

%  Rank 

D . 

.  76 

3.5 

72 

3 

75 

3 

76 

4 

73  3.5 

Fr . 

.  89 

1 

89 

1 

98 

1 

85 

1 

81  2 

Gou . 

.  84 

2 

84 

2 

81 

2 

83 

3 

86  1 

Gst . 

.  76 

3.5 

71 

4 

74 

4 

84 

2 

73  3.5 

Sk . 

.  65 

5 

60 

5 

51 

5 

58 

5 

50  5 

Av . 

.  78 

75 

74 

73 

73 

Tables  10  to  12  show  the  results  obtained.  From  them  the 
following  conclusions  may  be  drawn : 

(1)  Gst  is  the  fastest  and  Fr  the  next  fastest  silent  reader; 
the  same  two  observers  are  the  fastest  in  reading  aloud,  both  at 
normal  and  at  maximal  rates.  Sk  is  slowest  in  all  these  modes 
of  reading.  As  in  the  earlier  tests  Gou  speeds  up  less  in  skim¬ 
ming  than  do  the  others. 

(2)  Correlations  for  the  speed  of  reading  by  the  five  methods 
(calculated  by  the  Pearson  method)  are  as  follows: 

r  P.E. 


Normal  silent  and  maximal  silent . 70  .16 

Normal  silent  and  normal  aloud . 66  .17 

Normal  silent  and  maximal  aloud . 42  .25 

Normal  silent  and  skimming . 71  .16 

Maximal  silent  and  normal  aloud . 63  .19 

Maximal  silent  and  maximal  aloud . 65  .18 

Maximal  silent  and  skimming . 61  .19 

Normal  aloud  and  maximal  aloud . 62  .19 

Normal  aloud  and  skimming . 41  .25 

Maximal  aloud  and  skimming . 28  .28 


348 


THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PSYCHOLOGY 


We  find  that  there  is  greatest  correlation  between  skimming- 
rate  and  rate  for  normal  silent  reading.  Only  the  correlations 
which  are  several  times  the  probable  error  should  be  considered 
significant. 

(3)  From  the  average  time  for  all  the  observers  we  find  that 
the  order  of  speed  for  the  five  methods  is:  skimming,  maximal  silent, 
normal  silent,  maximal  aloud,  normal  aloud.  The  only  excep¬ 
tions  to  this  are  Gou  and  Sk,  both  of  whom  average  faster  at 
maximal  aloud  than  at  normal  silent.  If  we  take  the  time  for 
normal  aloud,  the  slowest  speed,  as  100,  then  maximal  aloud 
would  be  83,  normal  silent  74,  maximal  silent  60,  and  skimming 
40.  If  we  take  normal  silent  as  100,  then  normal  aloud  would 
be  135,  maximal  aloud  112,  maximal  silent  81,  and  skimming  54. 

(4)  Fr  and  Gou  are  the  best  reproducers,  and  Sk  the  poorest. 
In  comparing  (1)  and  (4)  we  find  that  one  of  the  fastest  readers 
is  one  of  the  best  reproducers,  and  that  the  slowest  reader  is  the 
poorest  reproducer,  which  is  what  we  should  have  expected  in 
consideration  of  the  results  obtained  by  Abell  ( Educational  Review , 
8,  1894:  283),  Dearborn  ( Psychology  of  Reading),  Huey  (Psy¬ 
chology  and  Pedagogy  of  Reading),  and  Quantz  ( Problems  in  the 
Psychology  of  Reading).  There  are,  however,  two  exceptions 
to  this  general  rule,  Gou  and  Gst,  for  Gou  is  one  of  the  best  repro¬ 
ducers  and  one  of  the  slowest  readers,  while  Gst  is  a  very  fast 
reader  and  not  a  particularly  good  reproducer.8 

(5)  From  the  average  reproduction,  we  find  that  the  repro¬ 
duction  is  likely  to  be  better  for  normal  silent  than  for  any  other 
speeds.  (Exceptions:  Gou  best  for  skimming;  Gst  best  for  maxi¬ 
mal  aloud.) 

(6)  From  the  mean  variations  (Table  12)  there  is  least  variation 
in  the  speed  of  normal  aloud,  and  most  for  skimming. 

(7)  The  mean  variations  for  the  different  observers  show  that 
in  general,  Fr  and  Gst  were  most,  and  D  and  Gou  least  variable. 

(8)  From  inspection  of  the  average  time  taken  to  read  the 
various  selections  and  of  the  mean  variations  for  each  speed, 
we  may  conclude  that  the  material  was  fairly  uniform  in  eifficulty. 

8  There  seems  to  be  an  explanation  of  this  paradox.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
Gou  proved  to  be  greatly  affected  in  speed  by  the  necessity  of  reproducing  at  the 
end.  It  therefore  seems  probable  that,  either  voluntarily  or  involuntarily,  she 
slowed  down  her  speed  in  order  to  make  a  better  reproduction  at  the  end,  while 
the  other  observers  did  not  do  this.  If  Gou  had  worked  under  exactly  the  same 
conditions  as  the  others,  there  might  have  been  a  change  in  her  position  as  a 
reproducer,  in  which  case  the  position  of  Gst  would  have  been  moved  up  and  the 
results  would  have  been  more  nearly  what  we  should  have  expected. 


SKIMMING  IN  READING 


349 


TABLE  12 

Per  Cent.  Mean  Variation  for  the  Various  Observers  in  Time  per  Word  for  the  Five 


Methods 

Silent  Aloud 

Normal  Maximal  Normal  Maximal  Skimming 
%  Rank  %  Rank  %  Rank  %  Rank  %  Rank 

D .  14.29  4  8.00  5  6.06  5  11.11  2.5  20.00  2 

Fr .  21.05  1  12.50  2.5  14.07  1  12.50  1  16.67  3 

Gou .  18.75  2  12.00  4  10.00  3  7.14  5  11.76  5 

Gst .  15.38  3  18.18  1  12.50  2  11.11  2.5  12.50  4 

Sk .  13.51  5  12.50  2.5  6.98  4  10.81  4  22.22  1 

Av .  13.60  12.64  9.92  10.53  16.63 


Conclusion 

The  principal  factual  conclusions  of  our  experimentation  have 
already  been  presented  in  the  summary  that  precedes  the  article. 
It  remains  only  to  remind  the  reader  that  our  study  has  been 
limited  to  a  small  group  of  adult  readers,  all  college-trained  and 
all  somewhat  familiar  with  the  subject  matter  read.  However, 
without  risking  generalization  we  can  at  least  say  that  our  study 
has  indicated  methods  that  may  be  employed  and  probably 
fore-shadowed  some  of  the  general  outcomes  that  may  be  expected 
in  a  more  comprehensive  survey  of  the  problem.  We  would 
suggest  that  a  fruitful  extension  of  the  present  investigation 
would  be  the  application  of  similar  methods  to  a  group  of  children 
of  perhaps  different  pedagogical  and  different  mental  levels, 
with  special  reference  to  the  effect  of  practice  and  to  the  limita¬ 
tions  placed  upon  skimming  by  degree  of  general  intelligence 
and  range  of  information,  or  special  familiarity  with  the  subject 
matter  employed. 

In  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary  we  are  disposed 
to  think  that  systematic  drill  in  skimming  is  desirable  for  children 
that  have  mastered  the  mechanics  of  reading  and  that  are  using 
reading  regularly  as  a  tool  for  the  acquisition  of  knowledge. 


